An exclusive interview with Patricia Piccinini.... and 'Graham'

Victoria’s Transport Accident Commission invited artist Patricia Piccinini to create a new work to illustrate the danger of speeding. As attention wanes or culture changes we need to find new ways to engage Australians with life-saving information. The artist hopes 'Graham' is a catalyst for a conversation about our bodies, behaviors and technology that is free of fear or guilt. Importantly ‘it’s not just a simple didactic work that tells people what to do’, said Piccinini.

Patricia Piccinini and Chloe Mandryk, Editor of Art Almanac, discuss ‘Graham’, a special public commission for Victoria’s Transport Accident Commission (TAC), 2016

Chloe Mandryk: How did ‘Graham’ come to be?

Patricia Piccinini: Last year I was approached by TAC and asked if I wanted to make a work that reflected on the issue of road safety. My first response was that it seemed a bit odd, but on reflection I could see that it could be really interesting. The idea of the social relevance of art is very important to me and here was a project that really attempted to use art to have a positive impact on real social policy. It is a very rare opportunity and a big challenge. So, when TAC explained how they wanted to see how a human might evolve to survive a care accident, I just thought ‘Wow I’m there!’ In ‘Graham’ we are seeing the body as protean, flexible and changeable – both strange and familiar. This is very much within my project: I’m interested in evolution and the changing relationship between the natural and the artificial.

CM: Why will audiences be captivated or moved, is it to do with our increasing interest with biotechnology or fantasy?

PP: Yes, they are all aspects that bring these ideas closer to the audience and make it accessible. That being said, it is sophisticated and complex. It’s not Hector the Road Safety Cat. It’s multivalent, to use a very 1980s term. It feeds into the notion of who we are and our potential for change. But the work doesn’t give us answers, it asks us what we really want to be.

CM: Government material is usually instructive but you are not prescribing what people take from your work.

PP: It allows for a whole bunch of intellectual and emotional reactions to something that we’re used to switching off about. It’s interesting to me that something like road safety is something the art world would not usually deem ‘worthy’ as a subject for art. Yet it is something that touches so many of us, and usually in an incredibly intense and emotional way.

CM: Did you go into any unchartered zones of research for this project?

PP: It was so fascinating. I spoke to medical professionals, safety, car engineers and people at the TAC. I got to know the real vulnerability of the human body. A trauma surgeon explained that in a crash you could bleed irreparably because of the force on your internal organs, your heart can pull apart from the arteries and the modest ‘buffer zone’ of liquid in your brain cavity means it will hit the front side of your skull and rebound. It’s like having an egg and shaking it up in your hand. So ‘Graham’ doesn’t have a neck, the ‘new human’ has a normal sized brain but there is a lot of liquid in the brain cavity as well as crumple zones on the face and rib-cage. It makes him look a bit helmeted or like an Orangutan, yet he is still very much a person. He has a thoughtful look. It’s a look of integrity. He’s a fortified mutation, powerful but grotesque.

CM: This creature is not aspirational for civilisation?

PP: No, he’s not a superhero. He walks a fine line between admiration and repulsion. I wanted it to be kind of conceivable and familiar but completely mutant and for us to consider the wonder of technology and the trauma it can bring. Would we want to go to this extent to protect ourselves? Our would it perhaps be easier just to drive more slowly?

CM: Did your process begin with thinking about the functionality of this being?

PP: It’s a pretty similar process to my other work, I conceive of an idea and then I go about finding a way to discuss it. Part of that discussion centres around empathy, how we feel about the body, and the innate bias against difference.

‘Graham’ is incredibly open, his huge chest cavity has organic air bags in it so that when he’s in a crash they take the impact and exude protection. In a crash you have to protect the brain, it gets completely lacerated and severed from its connections. The spinal column also often will break leading to paralysis. You must protect the vital organs. As such it’s a functional design that I can imagine growing out of an intestinal system.

CM: What do you hope the work will communicate?

PP: I hope that is inspires people to ask why he looks like he looks, and to therefore think about the vulnerability of a normal body. Do we want to push the body in this direction to protect ourselves or are there other ways we can deal with living in a world we were not evolved for.

I also hope that people outside the artworld come to artists more and more when they want to talk about important cultural ideas. I want inspire people across all industries to work with artists. Artists can do that; they’re just not given the opportunity.

CM: If more of these pairings of artists and government or private bodies were to occur there would be many wonderful reciprocal relationships. Artists will be enabled to do something they wouldn’t usually think of exploring. Art is one of those things that transcends your field, it’s about learning and dialogue.

PP: Yes, it’s like philosophy. People have an idea and then they discuss, share an then create a new way of being and looking at life. Art is the same, it needs people. You can’t just have one maverick genius. It happens because there is a culture that enables those people to come out with new ideas.

I’ve learnt so much about the human body and spoken to people I wouldn’t encounter usually. I have taken so much away from this experience and that will feed my practice in the future.